Exclusivist and conformist Hindutva stands in opposition to the basic essence of inclusivist and diverse Hinduism
By Dramila
It is important to distinguish the term Hindutva from Hinduism. Hindutva is a right-wing, militant, exclusivist ideology, a modern concept with hundred years of history, promoted by the RSS and its affiliate organisations such as the BJP, VHP and the Bajrang Dal, collectively known as the Sangh Parivar. Whereas, Hinduism is an ancient religion, composed of a syncretic and diverse number of belief systems with tolerance and inclusivity as some of the basic features. In some ways, the exclusivist and conformist Hindutva stands in opposition to the basic essence of inclusivist and diverse Hinduism.
In the current narrative that is dominating the Indian subcontinent, Hindutva positions itself as a nationalistic ideology, hijacks patriotism and arrogates the love-for-the-nation for itself, calling ‘others’ as an enemy of the state, or a traitor.
Back in History
Is this narrative true? Or is it a manufactured opinion that is based on falsehoods and lies? To understand this, we need to go back into history, and check the credentials of Hindutva and the Sangh Parivar.
Recently, Veer Savarkar, who was associated with the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, has been added to the pantheon of freedom fighters such as Patel, Bose and Ambedkar. But if we go back into history, we see that neither Veer Savarkar nor the RSS participated in the freedom struggle. On the other hand, they actively supported British rule in India. And worse, they looked down upon those who went to prison, calling it a show of ‘superficial patriotism’, criticising the Non-Cooperation Movement citing it is bound to produce ‘bad results’, where people will feel there is ‘no need to think of the law’.
When the Quit India Movement was in full swing in 1942, all nationalist leaders, including Gandhi and Bose, withdrew their support to the British government, but the RSS chose not to participate in the Movement, and instead chose to support the British war efforts offering full military cooperation to the British masters, thus betraying the national cause.
The RSS did not write a single line challenging, exposing, criticising or confronting the inhuman rule of the British masters from 1925 to 1947, and none of its leaders went to prison for freedom struggle
At Bhagalpur in 1941, Veer Savarkar urged his followers to intensify the ‘militarization movement’ and directed his organisation to ‘actively engage in rousing the Hindu people to join the army, navy, the aerial forces’. Throughout British rule, the RSS has not written a single line challenging, exposing, criticising, or confronting the inhuman rule of the British masters from 1925 to 1947, and none of its leaders went to prison for freedom struggle.
Today, Hindutva and the Sangh Parivar have misappropriated the legacy of many leaders from the freedom struggle, including Bhagat Singh, Subhash Chandra Bose and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, whereas, during their lifetime, all these leaders rejected the Hindutva ideology. And RSS criticised the actions of heroes such as Bhagat Singh and Chandrasekhar Azad, expressing disdain for them. MS Golwalkar, the most influential Sarsanghchalak of the RSS, writes, “we have not looked upon their martyrdom as the highest point of greatness to which men should aspire. For, after all, they failed in achieving their ideal, and failure implies some fatal flaw in them.”
Patel’s Legacy
In recent times, Hindutva and the BJP have appropriated the legacy of Patel, lionising him as if he is one of their own, and building statues for him. But history tells us that it was Patel who banned the RSS in 1948 for its role in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, citing, ‘all their speeches were fill of communal poison. As a final result of the poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life of Gandhiji’.
History tells us that it was Patel who banned the RSS in 1948 for its role in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, citing, ‘all their speeches were fill of communal poison’
The same year, Patel wrote to Hindu Mahasabha leader Syama Prasad Mookerjee indicting the RSS for continuing with its activities despite the ban: ‘There is no doubt in my mind that the extreme section of the Hindu Mahasabha was involved in the conspiracy [to kill Gandhi]. The activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of Government and the State… the RSS circles are becoming more defiant and are indulging in their subversive activities’. As an organisation, the RSS has the dubious record of having been banned three times so far.
Conflicting Ideology
Today, Hindutva positions itself as a nationalistic and patriotic ideology. Recently, on the 75th anniversary of Indian Independence, Hindutva and the BJP urged everyone to put a flag on their homes, while some leaders suggested that no ration will be given to those who do not put up a flag. But it may come as a surprise that the RSS was staunchly opposed to the Indian Flag. It did not hoist the Indian Flag at its Nagpur headquarters for nearly 52 years, resuming it only in 2002. And when three activists, in defiance, sneaked into the headquarters to hoist it in 2001, they were arrested and jailed.
Back in 1949, when the Constituent Assembly of India adopted the current tricolour Indian National Flag, the RSS was the only organisation which rejected the flag, calling it ‘sheer nonsense’ that it is acceptable by all, and that they ‘cannot possibly choose a flag with a view to satisfy the desires and wishes of all the communities.’ So, when India unfurled the new Indian Flag for the first time on the ramparts of Red Fort in Delhi on 15th August 1947, the RSS wrote that the Tricolour shall ‘never be respected and owned by Hindus’, and that the flag ‘is injurious’ to the country.
The RSS has called for the rejection of the Indian Constitution citing that it did not include the code of Manusmriti, the infamous antiquated document which BR Ambedkar burned in 1927 because it demeaned lower caste and women, advocated untouchability, enforced patriarchy and described women as sex objects.
When the Constituent Assembly finalised the Constitution in 1949, the RSS rejected it citing ‘To this day [Manusmriti] laws… excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.’ After the Indian Constitution was adopted in 1950, the RSS reaffirmed its support for the Manusmriti as the final lawgiving authority for Hindus, rather than the Constitution of India, writing, ‘Even though Dr Ambedkar… stated… that the days of Manu have ended. it is nevertheless a fact that the daily lives of Hindus are even at present-day affected by the principles and injunctions contained in the Manusmrithi.’
Controlled Autocracy
It didn’t stop there. The RSS is a vocal critic of Indian federalism and favours centrally controlled autocracy. In 1961, it wrote that India’s federalism ‘not only gives birth but also nourishes the feelings of separatism’, and that it destroys the nation. The RSS called for federalism to be ‘completely uprooted, constitution purified, and unitary form of governments be established’. And while the Indian Constitution maturely enables the formation of new States, the RSS opposed the formation of new States altogether. In 1954, Golwalkar vehemently opposed the formation of Maharashtra from Bombay State, saying, ‘India should have Central Rule and from the administrative point of view, States should be administered territories.’
Savarkar in 1937 wrote: “India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary, there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Muslims”
One of the biggest myths that has been propagated by the Hindutva group is that they had always opposed Partition, and in this regard, they blame Gandhi and Nehru for having allowed it. But contrary to the manufactured popular opinion, the RSS had actually endorsed and supported the two-nation theory, echoing the same view as that of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, that the then India is in fact made of ‘two antagonistic nations living side by side’. Savarkar in 1937 wrote: ‘India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary, there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Muslims.’
It is no wonder why Hindutva continuously pushes India into becoming a Hindu version of Pakistan, the other side of the same coin, a nation based on the primacy of religion. Currently, like how Pakistan discriminates against its own people on religion, and sects, where Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ahmadiyyas , Shias, Sufis, face persecution, Hindutva and the BJP create a divide between religions by demonising and dehumanising Muslims and Christians in India.
From history, we understand that the current RSS, BJP and its affiliates have their origins in the legacy that has overwhelmingly supported British rule, has not participated in the Indian freedom struggle, belittled the war heroes such as Bhagat Singh, misappropriated the leader who banned them, rejected the Indian National Flag, openly rejected the Indian Constitution, opposed Indian Federalism, and supported Partition. Therefore, to the question, ‘whether Hindutva is as patriotic or nationalist as they claim to be?’ the answer is quite obvious!